A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On November 13, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1 million for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court's Sung-dong branch on November 13, 2006, and on August 23, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for six months for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving). On June 9, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Daegu District Court's Ansan-dong branch on October 8, 201.

On May 22, 2012, the Defendant driven a 3km B km-off vehicle at the front side of the Cheongnam-gun, Cheongnam-gun, a Cheongnam-gun, in a state of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.066%, from May 22, 2012 to the front side of the Geumho-ri, if the Defendant is a mountain of the same military in the same area in the front side of the Geumho-ri.

Accordingly, the Defendant, even though he had a driving force twice or more, was driving under the influence of alcohol as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on detection of a host driver;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Inquiry letters, summary orders and court rulings, application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the number and accommodation of individuals;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant is subject to criminal punishment several times due to drunk driving, the defendant is at the same time under the influence of alcohol driving even though he/she is under the period of repeated crime due to the present drinking driving, and the purpose of the revision of the Road Traffic Act to strengthen punishment for drunk driving, etc., it is inevitable to sentence the defendant as a sentence.

However, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects his depth, and the drinking water of this case is relatively not high, and all of the arguments of this case are shown in the arguments of this case, such as the age, health status, family relationship, personality and conduct, environment, motive for the crime and circumstances after the crime.